District of Columbia Vs. Dickson - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation

legalcrystal.com/88374

Court

US Supreme Court

Decided On

Feb-15-1897

Case Number

165 U.S. 341

Appellant

District of Columbia

Respondent

Dickson

Excerpt:
district of columbia v. dickson - 165 u.s. 341 (1897)
u.s. supreme court
district of columbia v. dickson, 165 u.s. 341 (1897)
district of columbia v. dickson
no. 620
submitted january 4, 1897
decided february 15, 1897
165 u.s. 341
appeal from the court of claims
syllabus
district of columbia v. johnson,
165 u. s. 330
, approved and again followed.
the case is stated in the opinion.
mr. justice peckham delivered the opinion of the court.
in this case, which is of the same general nature as the foregoing cases, the petitioner, who was the assignee of one of the contractors, filed his original petition in the court of claims december 15, 1880. the case, after being heard, was submitted to that court on.....

Judgment:

District of Columbia v. Dickson - 165 U.S. 341 (1897)
U.S. Supreme Court
District of Columbia v. Dickson, 165 U.S. 341 (1897)

In this case, which is of the same general nature as the foregoing cases, the petitioner, who was the assignee of one of the contractors, filed his original petition in the Court of Claims December 15, 1880. The case, after being heard, was submitted to that court on the 26th of May, 1882, and was by it dismissed on the 29th of May, 1882. On the 6th of April, 1895, the judgment was vacated, and a new trial granted by virtue of the act of February 13, 1895. 31 Ct.Cl. 399.

The difference between the contract price and the board-rate price was claimed, and Dickson, as assignee, was allowed to recover $1,386.30 for such difference, belonging to him by virtue of the assignment, and which sum the court held to have "been due and payable June 2, 1873, within the meaning and intent of the Act of February 13, 1895, and the Act of June 16, 1880."